Fear and Loathing in Psychopaths: a Meta-Analytic Investigation of the Facial Affect Recognition Deficit
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Several studies have identified an association between psychopathy and deficits in facial affect recognition. Although this finding is widely seen as providing strong evidence for amygdala dysfunction in psychopaths, this interpretation is challenged by studies finding no recognition impairments. An alternative hypothesis predicts that recognition deficits are dynamic and are influenced by verbal processing demands. These competing hypotheses were tested via a meta-analysis of 22 investigations of psychopathy ( N = 1,387 participants) using the facial affect recognition paradigm. Results indicated that studies entailing a verbal response style found larger recognition deficits for emotions processed by the left amygdala. The findings of this review offer an alternative to currently popular theories of psychopathy and suggest that future research should consider response style when investigating facial affect recognition deficits in this population.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it